Little Essays on Truth

TRUTH.

What is Truth? It is absurd to attempt to define it, for when we say that S is P, rather than S is Q or S is R, we assume that we already know the meaning of Truth. This is really why all the discussions as to whether Truth depends on external correspondence, internal coherence, or what not, neither produce conviction, nor withstand analysis. Briefly, Truth is an idea of a supra-rational order, pertaining to Neschamah, not to Ruach. That all rational conceptions imply that we know Truth, and that Truth is in their propositions, only shows that these so-called rational ideas are not really rational at all. Truth is by no means the only idea that resists rational analysis. There are very many ideas that remain indefinable: all simple ideas do so. At the back of all our efforts is the dead wall that we must already know what we are pretending to find our. Consider the statement of the Angel in the 5th Aethyr inThe Vision and the Voice:

...all the symbols are interchangeable, for each one containeth in itself its own opposite. And this is the great Mystery of the Supernals that are beyond the Abyss. For below the Abyss, contradiction is division; but above the Abyss, contradiction is Unity. And there could be nothing true except by virtue of the contradiction that is contained in itself.

Also from somewhere in GW – "Concept of Freedom transcends all opposites"

Tags

truth

crowley

freedom

Comments

Si saysExactly! In summary, truth is that which is so, and what is so is what is so to you. Anything else is irrational.

Mark de LA saysIt doesn’t say that.

Si saysI read it very carefully several times and summarized it the best I can in the structure of who and what I am and what I believe. So … that is exactly what it says (to me).

Your idea is welcome to differ. It would be nicer if you explained the difference instead of just punching me with a though.

Seth saysMy interpertation hangs on one sentence above: “Briefly, Truth is an idea of a supra-rational order, pertaining to Neschamah, not to Ruach.” Unfortunately the links under the words do not resolve for me what the difference was in Crowley’s mind. But i rather think, with just a bit of reading around, that Neschamah relates to individual souls, and Ruach relates to God. So if that holds together than i will go with Nathan’s interpretation. Truth is what each of us feels about something, not what God knows about it.

That “each distinction contains its opposite” ← is true to me. That the opposites get switched in going from domain to domain is irrelevant to my ontology … so i will leave that just where Crowley has put it … it is not my affair.

But what GW said, "Concept of Freedom transcends all opposites" is intriguing in the extreme … i will need to digest that one

Si says👍

Si saysI interpret “Concept of Freedom transcends all opposites” to simply be a statement of the fact that you have freedom because it is your story and you are writing it … i.e. your authorship ultimately transcends all other beliefs and circumstances, limited only by the beliefs and circumstances of the story you are writing.

Seth saysit could mean that … or it could mean something deeper … me, i do not know … i would need to read the context in which it was said. i am not so very sure that it does not mean to GW (or Crowley) something that i do not even believe.

Si saysOkay. I am responding to it “stand alone” for I assume that when it is said alone, it is intended by the person who wrote it there to stand alone. If it is only true in a context, then the context reference should be included, right?

Especially since @mark doesn’t like the M$M exactly because they include things out of context without reference, I would not ever expect him to do that. If he says it alone, it must be able to stand alone … and represent his point of view.

Si says… also, I am not sure what “something deeper” could be. The level where you are creativly writing the components of the story you are experiencing, and the role you are playing, seems to me to be as deep as you can go without merging back into the one.

Seth saysyour interpertation is simple and hangs together well … at least to me.

yet don’t forget that GW and Crowley and Mark may well be running on a story radically different than the one you are telling. i would not be surprised if in their story this is quite different than you expect.

Notice this part of their story … “And this is the great Mystery of the Supernals that are beyond the Abyss. For below the Abyss, contradiction is division; but above the Abyss, contradiction is Unity. And there could be nothing true except by virtue of the contradiction that is contained in itself."

What Abyss? Why is nothing true except by virtue of the contadiction that is contained in itself?

Mark should be able to shed more light on this than me.

Si saysAgreed, stories differ.

In my story the Abyss is what is below the level of the story that creates an entity … i.e. I am calling it “the one” … so in my story it all seems to hang together very well.

Mark de LA saysI said somewhere this AM not going to argue “my truth” & “your truth” enjoy the smugness of Egoes & take some more selfies of them.

Seth saysi was not aware of any “arguing” going on … i thought we were just trying to hear Crowley’s story.

Mark de LA saysWith Concept of Freedom transcends all opposites
one can have alignment with both sides of the Tao of anything. One is free to transcend. One does not have to argue, promote. etc a single point of view governed by Egoo. Or from the commentaries:

P.2007- 71-4-1-5-7-49 Mon. " Agitation, propaganda & political action involved in prevalent pseudo Utopian self-serving P R are not part of our policy; the True Spirit impels from within, forces no one & constrains no one even by persuasion!"

N seems to create bullies in his multiverse - true or imagined – most likely a reflection!

Si says👍

Si saysI agree Seth. I am speaking of truth and tying together the ideas about it I recognize here in the model I live by. I am not arguing with @mark’s version, which I already said he is welcome to … surely @mark does not expect me to write my words in the circumstances and beliefs of his model in order to be “not arguing”?

Seth saysthanks mark … lots there to hear in relation to the story above … give me a moment or two.

Si saysSorry about that. But I am not going to just stand and keep hush when I am getting bully punched. @mark can take it to the group fbi gossip if he feels the need to do that IMHO.

Mark de LA says👍

Mark de LA saysN seems to create bullies in his multiverse – most likely his imagination or reflection. transcend or keep the chimera going. Enjoy the Egoo.

Seth says@mark, every time you say things like “ Enjoy the Egoo. ” that is heard by your audience as being bashed. Trust me on that one mark, you have done it to me so very many times and that is always the way it feels.

Mark de LA saysEvery time you interpret something as bashing yu are losing the meaning of:

Concept of Freedom transcends all opposites

by grasping polarity & turning something into a RWG

Si saysI don’t like how being punched in a bullying like manner feels. Make of that whatever you want.

Seth says👍

Seth says … “Concept of Freedom transcends all opposites” … must be even deeper than i at first imagined , since it apparently justifies punching sombody else in the belly.

Mark de LA says👍

Mark de LA saysOne level above the Tao suggests that freedom is Love in action not constrained by one end of a polarity or another.

& you will feel better about it. Nothing physical is happening except conversation. Listening to you folks proselytizing & agitation, propaganda & political action is just about as tasty as my stuff must be to you.

TRANSCEND!

Seth saysincidentally freedom in my story is independant of love … love in itself is one end of a polarity. that is where me and GW started disagreeing … he said “you are free only when you do what is right (love)” or words to that effect …. me i say, “if i am free, then i determine what is right for me (love or not love)”.

but that is just my story.

i am trying to hear Crowleys … in and of itself. i still don’t think i have it.

Seth saysfair enough . you know now SiriTD allows you to hide where we went wrong … don’t forget to hide what provoked that too.

Mark de LA saysRS in his fundamental book The Philosophy of Freedom defines freedom as doing something out of Love or action from Love. He also handles the duality thingy in there somewhere. The same spirit pervades the notion of the

Concept of Freedom transcends all opposites

Mark de LA saysHiding not really my thngiy – I usually do it only when the RWG is wasting to much of my time & the bait is too fresh or tasty to ignore.

Seth sayswell it not being “your thing” and all notwistanding … it still is the solution to your complaint. and, strangely enough, me thinks that SiriTD evolved it especially for you to use to your ends.

Mark de LA saysThanks for the veiled or unveiled suggestion. I am proceeding as I will, steaming as before, as always & normal.
(Wherever my love takes me)